THE Prime Minister will not try to force his controversial rise in spending on foreign aid into law this year.

Critics of the spiralling budget urged him to kill off his pledge to bring in laws obliging Britain to spend at least 0.7 per cent of national income on aid per year.

A Bill is not now expected to feature in next month’s Queen’s Speech, which will set out the Government’s programme for the coming year.

But the legislation has not been ruled out for the following year – the last before the general election due in 2015.

The Prime Minister is expected to stress that the most important thing is that Britain hits the UN aid target for the first time and that Parliament must therefore focus on economic growth.

Mr Cameron faces a revolt by many Tory MPs if he tries to push the law through – but he insists aid should be protected from the budget reductions inflicted on other departments.

However, many in his own party are adamant that ever more generous overseas aid is the wrong priority when so ­many Britons are enduring harsh cuts.

Ruth Porter, of the Institute of Economic Affairs think tank, said: “The Government should abandon any idea of enshrining the 0.7 per cent target in law. The figure is arbitrary and there is clear evidence that in many cases aid makes situations worse, not better.”

Enshrining the spending pledge in law by 2015 – a promise made in the Coalition agreement and in the 2010 Tory manifesto – would mean future governments’ having to change the law if they want to cut aid below the 0.7 per cent UN target.

In his March Budget, Chancellor George Osborne hailed as an “historic moment” his announcement that Britain will this year meet its target of spending 0.7 per cent of Gross National Income (GNI) on aid.

This year total British aid is estimated at £11.3billion. Most of it is managed by the International Development Department – although its budget has been cut to reflect lower GNI forecasts.

Mr Osborne is not actively opposed to aid legislation, but a source said: “In his view the key achievement is that we are going to actually deliver on the 0.7 per cent pledge this year, something he’s very proud of.”

A spokesman for Mr Cameron insisted there was “no change” in the promise to legislate but declined to comment on the contents of the Queen’s Speech.

One minister, speaking anonymously, said introducing the new law would only get harder the longer it was left out. “We should have done it in the first year,” said the minister. Lib Dem sources insisted legislation would be passed.

We know that aid is most effective when it is predictable and so the ­certainty provided by legislation is crucial

Melanie Ward

Melanie Ward, of development charity ActionAid, said it was “extremely disappointing” to hear the Government might drop its commitment to a Bill.

She said: “We know that aid is most effective when it is predictable and so the ­certainty provided by legislation is crucial. Now is the time to enshrine that commitment in law, not to back away.”

Labour Shadow International Development Secretary Ivan Lewis said: “Enshrining the link between aid and national income in law would mean our contribution to the fight against world poverty would be permanently linked to the state of our nation’s finances.

“If David Cameron was serious about delivering on aid he’d honour the commitment he made. Instead it seems this will become just another in a long list of broken promises.”